Perun
Public Area Guest
Issa (Vis) [1:76:24]
Posts: 2,506
|
Post by Perun on Dec 9, 2003 22:58:55 GMT
I know that this is unpopular one, but sometimes it just doesn't make sense to run around the map forever, especially if game mode is to kill all enemy characters...
|
|
Ringthane
Public Area Guest
Ardet nec Consumitur
Posts: 5,446
|
Post by Ringthane on Dec 9, 2003 23:03:39 GMT
Man, that's the same as asking for an eject button to cure a headache... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrowhawk on Dec 10, 2003 12:24:32 GMT
No, no. Once again I. has hit on something that I am working on.
Just like dead players though, what should we do with a surrendering/retiring player's lords?
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrowhawk on Dec 10, 2003 14:05:11 GMT
I would suggest that armies and garrisons of a dead player becomes recruitable for the players not involved in the slaying of their dead lord. In effect, if player A kill player B, then all player B's armies remain hostile to A, but unaligned and recruitable for players C and D. BTW, can the armies of three or more players participate in the same battle? Would it be possible for some players to ally themselves against other players? To take these in turn: Alignment - would this not dissuade you from attacking the enemy player-lord, since then all his lords become available to the other players? I can imagine the scene - "after you natmus", "no, no, you first ringthane, I insist!", "no, not at all, I really couldn't"...  Multi-Player Battles: Yes - you can have a three or four way scrap. Could be messy, but definately fun  Alliances: Due in a future release. Conceptually easy I think, but I'd need to rework the database and code quite a lot. |
|
|
|
Post by Old Shendemiar on Dec 10, 2003 16:44:34 GMT
How about "I Suffer" button. I would immediately send emails to all registered users complaining variuos, awful things like PERUN hacked me, I have no MU'opponent present....
|
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Dec 10, 2003 18:11:13 GMT
No, no. Once again I. has hit on something that I am working on. Just like dead players though, what should we do with a surrendering/retiring player's lords? How about half the lords (closest ones) swear fealty to the slayer on the spot (they being awed by the pover of the victorious king) and the other half revert to neutral. |
|
Freiegeister
Morkin Member
'Blasphemy is a victimless crime' - Dawkins
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by Freiegeister on Dec 10, 2003 22:39:36 GMT
A surrender button could be useful to pull out of a game if you have to go away for a while and don't want to hold things up.
Alternatively...You could "Withdraw" and take all your armies with you.
Or...Have some sort of setting to allow you to be skipped in the turns. Just make sure all your armies are secure if you plan to come back.
As for a surrender...
I like the idea of your armies remaining in place (say, mark as being formally loyal to you) and according to the roll of the dice they flee and disappear, head for home, stay and fight, or become recruitable.
Head for home could mean someone else suddenly finding a non-aligned army wanting it's Citadel or Keep back. At which point it would be recruitable.
|
|
Perun
Public Area Guest
Issa (Vis) [1:76:24]
Posts: 2,506
|
Post by Perun on Dec 10, 2003 22:58:54 GMT
Impossible, just as JY vividly explained.  ;D Impossible also. This is exactly as the first, just takes a little longer. Idea of dissapearing is good. Taken from real life, this is most probable situation. That, and sacrificial slaughter of surrendered enemy soldiers. Sad, but true. Heading for home doesn't sound right. If I take citadel of Dawn and kill Bob's Lord Dawn, where the remaining soldiers would go to? Home? Former home isn't there any more! And we don't want any newcomers (or former soldiers)! Again, sad but true. Stay and fight? That's much more probable. We'll fight to the death, just to save our bu.tts. Good idea. Sheer survival. I have a slightly different proposal. Lord that slayed our master was good enough to let us go in peace (not very likely, see above), so we went in small groups and taken posts in other keeps/citadels. Meaning - surviving soldiers are scattered around other keeps/citadels. Alignment is not important, just a race. |
|
Freiegeister
Morkin Member
'Blasphemy is a victimless crime' - Dawkins
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by Freiegeister on Dec 10, 2003 23:23:24 GMT
Heading for home doesn't sound right. If I take citadel of Dawn and kill Bob's Lord Dawn, where the remaining soldiers would go to? Home? Former home isn't there any more! And we don't want any newcomers (or former soldiers)! Again, sad but true. Sorry, I was considering this from the position of what to do with armies (With Lords) loyal to a player who just got slayed. Armies without a Lord shouldn't really happen, as your troops should die to a man before the Lord bites it. Then, sh1t happens... Lord Dreams died after falling from his horse! In which case I like this idea: I have a slightly different proposal. Lord that slayed our master was good enough to let us go in peace (not very likely, see above), so we went in small groups and taken posts in other keeps/citadels. Meaning - surviving soldiers are scattered around other keeps/citadels. Alignment is not important, just a race. I think race is under-emphasised in the game at the moment: In who can recruit who, and how armies behave in the field. Foul and Free under the same banner, I think implausible! |
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Dec 11, 2003 7:57:27 GMT
I still like the idea that
a) the slayer would get some of the dead kng's lords as a reward
b) other players would have a chance at recruiting some of them
(In Four Horsemen I'm bumping into Shandemair's lords all over the map, some of them still in their original positions - and the guidance doesn't tell that they're already recruited. And yes, I parked my king at a tower and am seeking all days long, then sending scouts to visit places of interest.)
So let me improve slightly on my previous idea: lords in a certain radius from the place where their king was slain become loyal to his slayer, others revert to neutral.
But since different solutions work for different games, there might be a button on the games page that would allow to set alliance / neutrality / disappearence for dead king's lords, and so the setting would be left to player agreement.
|
|
Ringthane
Public Area Guest
Ardet nec Consumitur
Posts: 5,446
|
Post by Ringthane on Dec 11, 2003 8:56:47 GMT
Kingless troops:
- alternatively could they revert to garrison the closest (to their homes) neutral keep? then if the closest (to their homes) neutral keep is already garrisoned, next kingless army garrisons the second closest (to their homes) neutral keep and so on?
Race:
- under the context of all of us players acting as would-be uniters of the land, foul and free, like fey and dwarf, would not bear too much of a grudge to each other if rallied under the same pennant... beside armies (will)benefit from each race's specific bonuses in the future... ;D
|
|
Perun
Public Area Guest
Issa (Vis) [1:76:24]
Posts: 2,506
|
Post by Perun on Dec 11, 2003 16:00:53 GMT
a) This just don't make any sense. No offense, Matija. Who would fight for yesterday's enemy? I don't know, it just doesn't seem right...
b) Sure, and this is just a derivation of my former post. Other players can recruit them again in other keeps/citadels. And this is the easiest to implement.
Agreed. If the storyline is right, we can even allow a).
|
|
Perun
Public Area Guest
Issa (Vis) [1:76:24]
Posts: 2,506
|
Post by Perun on Dec 11, 2003 16:05:51 GMT
This is not good - keeps are usually day or two away. This is practically the same as giving them to the conqueror immediately. Scattering around all keeps/citadels (or better - only citadels) is much better, and does not favor player that just killed opponents main lord.
Hmmm... foul to seek refuge in fey keeps? Fey in foul? Somehow doesn't seem right...
|
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Dec 11, 2003 16:55:03 GMT
a) This just don't make any sense. No offense, Matija. Who would fight for yesterday's enemy? I don't know, it just doesn't seem right... Didn't things like that happen in middle-ages? |
|
Perun
Public Area Guest
Issa (Vis) [1:76:24]
Posts: 2,506
|
Post by Perun on Dec 11, 2003 19:03:25 GMT
If you mean slaughter of defeated enemies, yes. And moreso in anthic and prehistoric times. Whole nations disappeared after losing wars.
But then again, modern history isn't without such monstrosities as well.
If you mean passing on another side, no. Only recently (hundred years or so) there's been such occasions. In ancient times honor was of much, much greater importance than it is today.
|
|
;D